
:^:^-W-'V&K: ; tf\A*~^-^JM>t:~^x--- 



O N»V. <L? 




4? ^ 



V T f » * •* c» 
S -Ufa % ^.^%>o /' 



0* "k ♦.TTT*' A 











^CF 








<&9* 

v- (V 



9,. * • . 










%? 



A 









.• ^ 







^-^ -. 











4 o 




■iks: 



^1? 






V 



^ .. 



.o ° 






O > 







,o s 




o^ t o"s ^b -x* • l ' • * ^* / C», *b., ,-; 



1 llf 



ENGLISH NEUTRALITY. 



IS THE ALABAMA A BRITISH PIRATE? 






^. — ■»»«»» 



Nett) fork: 

ANSON D. F. RANDOLPH, PUBLISHER, 

683 BROADWAY. 

18G3. 



TO 

ABIEL A, LOW, ESQ. 



When Great Britain was last in the position of requiring from 
other nations the observance of a strict neutrality, the unjust asper- 
sion was cast upon your house of fitting out a vessel in the interest of 
her enemy. The searching investigation — demanded by you — which 
followed, led to your complete vindication, and an indignant declara- 
tion by the merchants of New York of their abhorrence of the crime 
against honest neutrality, which had been so falsely laid upon Ameri- 
can merchants. 

Now, when England is called upon to perform the duties of neu- 
trality, you become, by the loss of your ship, the Jacob Bell, a prin- 
cipal sufferer from her flagrant disregard of international justice and 
honor. 

These special circumstances alone, show an evident propriety in 
inscribing to you this reading of law and histoiy upon the cases of 
those public marauders, the Alabama and Florida. But other con- 
siderations unite to prove the fitness of such a dedication : and among 
them may be enumerated that eminent enterprise which has made 
your name the synonym of honor in the four quarters of the globe ; 
your unflinching and self-sacrificing patriotism in these days of trial ; 
your public and intelligent advocacy of right principles and right 
practice toward other nations under the irritating and embarrassing 
circumstances of the time ; and, above all, that universal judgment of 
the community in which you live, by which is conceded to you a union 
of public and private virtues fully entitling you to the high place 
you hold in men's esteem. 

The public voice will cordially endorse the truth of these observa- 
tions, and admit their force as a justification for joining your name 
to this effort to direct popular attention to those serious complications, 
now arising from the course of conduct towards this nation which 
Great Britain has chosen to adopt. 

With great respect, I am 

Your obedient servant, 

GKOSVENOR P. LOWREY. 

New York, March 14, 1863. — •— 



ENGLISH NEUTRALITY 



During the past twelve months, numerous and notorious 
acts, in breach of those obligations of neutrality which are 
due from a friendly nation to another engaged in war, have 
been perpetrated against us by the British government and 
people. The action of our government touching these grave 
matters has been forbearing, although firm, and in all re- 
spects admirable, in contrast with the action and language of 
England herself in former times, under circumstances differ- 
ing from the present only in the respect that, from the char- 
acter of this war, our claim to the observance of strict 
neutrality is stronger than hers has, or could ever have 
been. The public journals of England announce that, far 
from any cessation of this evil industry, the arming and 
equipping of vessels to cruise against our commerce is going 
on with increased energy, and with such lack of disguise that 
we are forced to consider the councils of that country as want- 
ing in capacity or geedr-ikith. But little knowledge of inter- 
national history is requisite to decide ujdou which horn of the 
dilemma to locate the probability. 

Under such a state of facts, it is time that the people at 
large were led to consider, in the light of history and law, the 
exact character and limitation of their rights in such cases. 

That code which, under the general name of the Laws of 
Nations, is admitted to control the conduct of states toward 
each other, ought to be, and, as defined by the publicists, is, 
founded upon the most elevated considerations of morals, jus- 
tice, equity, and convenience. In this dignified system, un- 
der which nations act in view of all the world, it is the sub- 
stance, rather than the form of things, which is regarded ; 
and those small technicalities which, in municipal systems, 
often impede the course of justice, are rightly disregarded. 

The relation of neutrality which arises under the law of 
nations is declared by Phillimore, the latest and best English 
writer upon international law, to consist in two principal cir- 
cumstances : 



G 



ENGLISH NEUTRALITY. 



1. Entire abstinence from any participation in the war. 

2. Impartiality of conduct toward both belligerents. 

These obligations are frequently strengthened, and made 
obligatory upon all persons resident within the territorial ju- 
risdiction of a nation, by, first, treaties ; and, second, enact- 
ments* of the local legislature, or whatever, in each case, cor- 
responds to such a body. As between this nation and Great 
Britain, the right and duty of neutrality rest upon interna- 
tional law and the statutes of the respective countries. We 
have, on our part, endeavored to provide for the prevention 
or punishment of unneutral acts, by either citizens or stran- 
gers, while among us, through acts of Congress of 1794, 1818, 
and 1838. Great Britain has undertaken to accomplish the 
same end by act of Parliament, 59 Geo. III., c. 69.* A re- 
view of the action and demands of each government, in cases 

* The following are extracts from the act of 59 Geo. (III., commonly called the 
Foreign Enlistment Act : 

" Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, that if any person within any part of the United 
Kingdom, or in any part of his majesty's dominions beyond the seas, shall, without the 
leave and license of his majesty, for that purpose first had and obtained, as aforesaid, 
equip, furnish, fit out, or arm, or procure to be equipped, furnished, fitted out, or armed, 
or shall knowingly aid, assist, or be concerned in the equipping, furnishing, fitting out, 
or arming of any ship or vessel, with intent, or in order that, such shipor vessel shall be 
employed in the service of any foreign prince, state, or potentate, or of any foreign 
colon}', province, or part of any province, or people, or of any person or persons, exercis- 
ing or assuming to exercise any powers of government in or over any foreign state, 
colony, province, or part of any province, or people, as a transport, or storeship, or with 
intent to cruise or commit hostilities against any prince, state, or potentate, or against 
the subjects or citizens of any prince, state, or potentate, or against the persons exer- 
cising or assuming to exercise the powers of government in any colony, province, or 
part of any province, or country, or against the inhabitants of any foreign colony, prov- 
ince, or part of any province or country with whom his majesty shall not then be at 
war; or shall within the United Kingdom or any of his majesty's dominions, or in any 
settlement, colony, territory, island, or place belonging or subject to his majesty, issue 
or deliver any commission for any ship or vessel, to the intent that such ship or vessel 
shall be employed as aforesaid, every such person so offending shall be deemed guilty 
of a misdemeanor, and shall, upon conviction thereof, upon any information or indict- 
ment, be punished by fine and imprisonment, or either of them, at the discretion of the 
court in which such offender shall be convicted ; "and ever}' such ship or vessel, with the 
tackle, apparel, ; and furniture, together with all the materials, arms, ammunition, and 
stores, which may belong to or be on board of any such ship or vessel, shall be forfeit- 
ed ; and it shall be lawful for any officer of his majesty's customs or excise, or any 
officer of his majesty's navy, who is by law empowered to make seizures for any 
forfeiture incurred under any of the laws of customs or excise, or the laws of trade 
or navigation, to seize such ships and vessels as aforesaid, and in snch places and in 
such maimer in which the officers of his majesty's customs or excise and the 
officers of his majesty's navy are empowered respectively to make seizures under the 
laws of customs and excise, or under the laws of trade and navigation ; and that every 
such ship and vessel with the tackle, apparel, and furniture, together with all the ma- 
terials, arms, ammunition and stores, which may belong to or Leon board of such ship 
or vessel, may be prosecuted and condemned in the like manner, and in such courts as 
ships or vessels may be prosecuted and condemned for any breach of the laws made for 
the protection of the revenues, customs, and excise, or of the laws of trade and 
navigation. 

"Sec. 8. And be it further enacted, that if any person in any part of the United 



IS THE ALABAMA A BRITISH PIRATE? 7 

of infraction of neutral rights in times past, will be impor- 
tant, for the purpose of ascertaining what, precisely, is the 
law of nations upon this point ; hut that must he postponed 
for a statement of some of the facts of which we now complain. 

Upon the breaking out of the rebellion, the British govern- 
ment made haste to concede belligerent rights to the insur- 
gents, and to declare its intention to observe strict neutrality. 
The state of English law was such that this proclamation was . 
entirely uncalled for, as it could neither increase nor decrease 
legal obligations or penalties ; and its only effect was to guar- 
antee to adventurers, who might wish to enlist with the re- 
bellion, that they should thereby undergo no greater risks 
than the ordinary chances of regular war. The promulgation 
of the first proposition was generally taken to be, and per- 
haps was, intended to relieve such persons from the character 
and ugly responsibility of pirates and freebooters. It be- 
came, in fact, an invitation, as it did not, on the other hand, 
enjoin vigilance upon officials or threaten punishment to of- 
fenders. Under this encouragement, the business of ship- 
building for the South commenced, and went on with a rapid- t 
ity which was surprising to those who had forgotten that 
Manchester and Sheffield furnished supplies to maintain the 
Sepoy rebellion. The two principal cases are those of the 
war-steamers Oreto and Alabama. ,In February, 1862, it 
was notorious at Liverpool that the Oreto (now called the 
Florida), a newly-launched war-steamer, was intended for the 
Confederate service ; and the American minister, Mr. Ad- 
ams, wrote to Lord Kussell (Diplomatic CorresjDondence for 
1862), notifying him of the character of the vessel ; upon 
which the customs officer of that port was directed to inves- 

Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, or in any part of his majesty's dominions beyond 
the seas, without the leave and license of his majesty for that purpose first bad and ob- 
tained, as aforesaid, shall, by adding to the number of the guns of such vessel, or by 
changing those on board for other guns, or by the addition of any equipment forwar, 
increase or augment, or procure to be increased or augmented, or shall I e knowingly 
concerned in increasing or augmenting the warlike force of any ship or vessel of war, 
or cruiser, or other armed vessel, which, at the time of her arrival in any part of the 
United Kingdom, or any of his majesty's dominions was a ship-of-war, cruiser, or armed 
vessel in the service of any foreign prince, state, or potentate, or of any person or per- 
sons exercising or assuming to exercise any powers of government in, or over any 
colony, province, or part of any province, or people, belonging to the subjects of any 
such prince, state, or potentate', or to the inhabitants of any colony, province, or part of 
■any province, or country, under the control of any person or persons so exercising or 
assuming to exercise the powers of government, every such person so offending shall 
be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall, upon being convicted thereof, upon any 
information or indictment, be punished by fine or imprisonment, or either of them, at 
the discretion of the court before which such offender shall be convicted." 



b ENGLISH NEUTRALITY. 

tigate the matter. This zealous official proceeded to make 
inquiries of the builders, who informed him that the vessel 
was owned by Fawcett, Preston & Co., of Liverpool, and that 
they (the builders) believed she was destined for Palermo — 
stating, as the ground of this belief, that " they had been re- 
quested to name a master to take her to that port." No in- 
quiry appears to have been made of the owners or other per- 
sons, and the collector reported that the Oreto was, without 
. doubt, bound on a legitimate voyage. Upon further repre- 
sentations by Mr. Adams, an examination was made of her, 
when her crew was found to consist of fifty-two Englishmen 
and one American, and her cargo of one hundred and seventy- 
three tons of arms, for Palermo and Jamaica. These susj)i- 
cious circumstances, together with the universal public ru- 
mor as to her real destination, were disregarded, and she was 
permitted to sail. Her first port was Nassau, in New Provi- 
dence, a British colonial port. At this place her real char- 
acter was well known and no longer denied. Upon demand 
of the American consul, some sham proceedings were taken 
against her by the English local authorities, but she was de- 
tained only long enough for her new commander to reach her, 
and. then allowed to continue her piratical voyage. Her 
career since that time is fresh in the memory of every man, 
and need not be recapitulated. Her latest exploit is the, 
burning of the ship Jacob Bell. Mr. Adams writes (March 
7, Dip. Cor. 1862) : 

" The nominal destination of the Oreto for Sicily is the only advan- 
tage which appears to have been derived from my attempt to procure 
the interference of the government to stop her departure." 

The only apology for such dereliction was, " a polite expres- 
sion" by Lord Kussell " of regret ;" but "he did not see how 
her majestv's government could change its position." (Mr. 
Adams to Mr. Seward, April 16, 1862.) 

In the next case, that of the Alabama, this excuse (bad in 
itself), that the American minister did not furnish sufficient 
proof to justify interference by the government, is wholly 
wanting. On the 23d of June, 1862, Mr. Adams wrote to 
Lord Russell, informing him that the Oreto had gone to Nas- 
sau, and that another and more formidable war-steamer was 
nearly ready to follow her. Said he : 

"This vessel has been built and launched from the dockyard of per- 



IS THE ALABAMA A BRITISH PIEATE ? 9 

sons, one of whom is now sitting as a member of the House of Com- 
mons, and -is fitting out for the especial and manifest purpose of car- 
rying on hostilities at sea. It is about to be commanded by one of 
the insurgent agents, the same who sailed in the Oreto. The parties en- 
gaged in the enterprise are persons well known at Liverpool to be 
agents and officers of the insurgents in the United States, the nature 
and extent of whose labors are well explained in the copy of an in- 
tercepted letter, which I received from my government, and had the 
honor to place in your lordship's hands a few days ago." (Diplom. 
Corr. 128.) 

On the 25th, Lord Russell replied, stating that he had, 
without loss of time, referred the matter to the proper de- 
partment. On the 1st of July, the persons to whom the mat- 
ter was thus referred reported that the fitting out of this 
vessel had not escaped the attention of her majesty's revenue 
officers, and that, pursuant to directions, they had made in- 
quiries of the builders, who did not deny that she is built for 
a foreign government, but " do not appear disposed to an- 
swer any questions as to her destination when she leaves 
Liverpool.''' The government are not shown to have taken 
any offence at this trifling, but, on the contrary, declined to 
interfere until further proof should be presented. This de- 
mand was not difficult to be complied with, for within a few 
days affidavits were produced to the Board of Customs, upon 
which the opinion of Mr. Collier, an eminent English law- 
yer, was first taken, who replied : 

" It appears difficult to make out a stronger case of infringement of 
the Foreign Enlistment Act, which, if not enforced on this occasion, is 
little better than a dead letter." (Diplom. Corr. 152.) 

A further delay was caused by the rejection of these affi- 
davits on account of some technical defect in form ; but at 
last every captious objection being exhausted, copies of the 
perfected affidavits were, on the 23d of July, sent to Lord 
Russell ; but no action being taken, the Alabama went to 
sea at her leisure on the 29th. The flagrant delinquency 
of the government is admitted by Lord Russell on the 31st, 
in a conversation with Mr. Adams, at which time he stated 
that the delay of the government " had been caused by the 
development of a sudden malady in Sir John D. Harding, 
the queen's advocate, totally incapacitating Mm for the 
transaction of business. This made it necessary to call in 
other parties, whose opinion had at last been for a detention 
of the gunboat, but before the order got down to Liverpool 



10 ENGLISH NEUTRALITY. 

she ivas gone." It is not pretended that any expedition was 
used by the parties who came to the rescue of the*govern- 
ment when Sir John D. Harding's " malady" assumed interna- 
tional importance, or that any attempt was made to delay 
the gunboat temporarily, until a decision could be arrived 
at ; or that the telegraph or any extra-expeditious means of 
commuuication with Liverpool was made use of when this 
decision was " at last" obtained.* 

It should be stated, in justice to Earl Kussell, however, 
that he declared his intention to'send to Nassau to have the 
vessel intercepted ; but in that connection let it also be re- 
membered that he did not send ; or at least that he did not 
send to the British squadron to seize her elsewhere in that 
neighborhood, and that the Alabama has avoided that point 
with as much shrewdness as if her captain were possessed 
in advance of the intention of the British cabinet ; that, 
although she has been cruising in British West Indian waters 
for months, and has been for six days of the latter portion 
of the time lying in the British port of Kingston, to be re- 
fitted, no attempt has been made to seize or detain her, and 
that no prosecutions have been instituted against any of the 
many parties in England who infringed the Foreign Enlist- 
ment Act and the law of nations by conniving at her escape 
and perfecting her armament afterwards in Terceira.f 

* It may he remarked in passing, as a fair illustration of the fact, that a chang* 
in Lord Russell's stand-point of observation sometimes affects a change in his views 
of a subject ; that while Great Britain was thus violating every legal, moral, and 
honorable obligation to us, she was insisting with pertinacity and almost imperiousness 
against those wholesome restrictions on trade between New York and Nassau, which 
the collector of this port found it necessary to adopt in order to prevent the sending of 
supplies to the rebels (Dip. Corr., 145, 304), and that the inadvertent act of a prize- 
master, the ludicrous character of which the following note will explain, was magnified 
into an insult to the English nation, fit to become a subject for diplomatic correspond- 
ence (Dip. Cor. 244). 

1 New York, Jan. 3, 1862. 

"Sir: — I received your order to-day, stating for me to make a written statement 
" and explain the reason for hoisting the English Sag under the American Commodore ; 
"not being acquainted with the custom of bringing in prizes, I was under the im- 
/ "pression that I was right. My intention was to do right, but it was not done for 
"any bad purpose or intention to insult the English flag in any way whatever. I was 
"wrong for so doing, and truly hope the department will forgive me. 

"Jul IN BAKER 

'■'■Acting Master, U. S. N. 
Commodore Paulding.' 

It appears by a letter from Commodore Wilkes to the Secretary of the Navy (Dip. 
Cor., p. 229), that the British gun-boat Bull Dog knowingly gave passage to rebel naval 
officers, on their way to England to take charge of the Alabama and other vessels of her 
character. 

f As these sheets are going to press, I have received, through the courtesy of Mr. 
Grant, librarian of the Mercantile. Library, a pamphlet just published in London, en- 
titled, "The Alabama," from which the following extract is made: 

" The '290,' as she was then called, sailed, as we have seen, from Liverpool on the 



IS THE ALABAMA. A BRITISH PIE ATE ? 11 

Having seen by this statement what the British govern- 
ment failed to do, let us inquire what it ought to have 
done. And since this country and England are hound 

29 Ih of July, without register or clearance, under the command of Butcher, an Eng- 
lish subject, who had been referred to in the deposition of Passmore. She picked up an 
additional fifty men off Point Lynass, and proceeded to Terceira in the Azores, where she 
anchored in the Portuguese waters ; there she was shortly joined by a barque, the 'Agrip- 
pinn, ' which had sailed from the Thames with the greater portion of the privateer's guns 
and stores on board. The barque discharged her cargo into the '290,' which was 
still Hying the British ensign, and when the Portuguese authorities interposed, the per- 
son Butcher, it is alleged, represented his vessel. to be English, aiding the English 
barque, which he said was sinking. Another vessel shortly arrived from Liverpool, the 
steamer 'Bahama' (which was at first believed to be the U.S. steamer, 'Tuscaroraj' 
causing .some commotion on board), conveying the confederate officer Captain Semmes, 
with Bullock, and fifty additional men, and stores for the privateer. The Portuguese 
authorities then ordered all three vessels off, but they merely went to a secluded part 
of the coast, and completed the transhipment of the stores. The ' Bahama ' cleared 
from Liverpool on the twelfth of August, haying on board nineteen cases containing 
guns, gun-carriages, shot, rammers, &c, shipped by a firm of engineers and ironfound- 
ers of Liverpool. These cases were professedly shipped for Nassau. After the transfer 
of the cargo had been concluded Semmes took command, ran up the Confederate flag 
to the mast-head, and christened the new steamer the 'Alabama.' He read to the 
crew his commission from Jefferson Davis, as captain, and then made a speech, in 
which he explained the kind of warfare he proposed to wage, and called for volunteers. 
One hundred and ten of those on board consented, and forty refused, returning in the 
' Bahama ' to Liverpool. Of those who remained, it is stated, in a recently published 
letter from a Mr. Underhill, dated St. Thomas, West Indies, and which professes 
to give a narrative taken down from the lips of the boatswain of the 'Alabama,' 
during her passage from Liverpool to the Azores, that the most part belonged to the 
English Naval Reserve, all trained gunners, and that the crew receive from the Con- 
federate government half the value of every American ship and cargo destiwed. The 
' Bahama ' took out gold to pay the crew, and after transferring her cargo returned with 
the barque to England, while the privateer set out on its mission of destruction. " 

The general bad faith, or, at the very least, criminal apathy of the British govern- 
ment in this matter, was so great as to draw from Mr. Adams this indignant declara- 
tion (Letter to Mr. Seward, Dip. Cor. 219) : "It is very manifest that no disposition 
exists here to apply the powers of the government to the investigation of (he acts com- 
plained of, flagrant as they are, or to the prosecution of offenders." Upon the part of 
Lord Russell, the correspondence is exceedingly ingenious in devising reasons for post- 
poning the consideration of, or refusing to grant the demands of the American Minister. 
On the 4th of Sept. (Dip. Cor. 200), Mr. Adams, in writing to Lord Russell on the subject 
of the escape of the Alabama, July 29, was compelled to complain thus : "I have not yet 
received a.ny reply in writing to my several notes and representations I have had the 
honor to submit to her majesty's government touching this flagrant case." The answer 
to this was at last received on the 22d, and consisted of excuses, among which Sir John 
D. Harding's "malady'' does not appear. One may benevolently hope that Sir John D. 
Harding was able to forget it as easily as Lord John Russell. Let *he reader contrast 
the churlish temper of the following letter, which is a fair specimen of Lord Russell's 
style, with the earnest, open, and liberal language of this government, as it will be 
hereinafter shown. 

" Fokekhs Office, Oct. 16, 1862. 

" Sir : — I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 9th inst., enclosing a 
copy of an intercepted letter which you had received from the United States government, being 
the further evidence with regard to the gun-boat " 290 ;" .... and with reference to your 
observations with regard to th ■ infringement of the Foreign Enlistment Act, 1 have to remark, that 
it is true that the Foreign Enlistment Act, or any other act for the same purpose, can be evaded by 
very subtle contrivances; but her majesty's government cannot on that account go beyond the 
letter of the existing law." (Dip. Cor. 223.) 

Perhaps Lord Russell means that to decide in time is to go beyond the letter of the 
law ; for it is of the failure to do that that Mr. Adams complains. The decision, as it 
was " at last" given, was entirely satisfactory, and had it been made known before vor- 
stead of after the departure of the ' ' 290, " the " letter" of the law, as Lord Russell un- 
derstands it, might have been a little shattered, but the spirit of the law, which now 
lies wickedly violated, would have been preserved. 



12 ENGLISH NEUTRALITY. 

to each other in mutual obligations of neutrality, arising 
from the same general law of nations, and from legislative 
enactments almost entirely similar, it is fair to show, first, 
how we conducted ourselves toward her at a time when our 
present positions were reversed. 

America had scarcely taken upon herself the habitudes of 
a nation before she was called to perform her international 
obligations of neutrality. The circumstances involved great 
embarrassment. One belligerent was our friend, benefactor, 
and sister republic, France ; the other was our enemy and 
late tyrant, England. We were weak and but poorly pre- 
pared to resist the importunities of our friend, to whom we 
owed so large a debt of gratitude. We were also entangled 
by treaty stipulations with her, under which she enjoyed 
certain privileges in our waters to the exclusion of Eng- 
land ; and this again, together with a strong public sympa- 
thy for her, caused President Washington and his ad- 
visers great difficulty in securing for England an impartial 
observance of neutrality in the matters not touched by the 
treaty. 

Yet, notwithstanding all this, President Washington, in 
the inaugural speech of his second term, proceeded to de- 
clare a strict rule of neutrality, under the law of nations, 
which has been faithfully observed to this day. (Speech to 
Congress, American State Papers. Foreign Eelations, vol. 
1, p. 21.) On the 22d of ^P 1 ' 11 ; 1793, he issued his procla- 
mation containing these words : 

" / have given instructions to those officers to whom it belongs, to 
cause prosecutions to be instituted against all persons who shall, within the 
cognizance of the courts of the United States, violate the law of nations 
[we had no statute at that time] with respect to the powers at war, 
or any of them." (Ibid., 140.) 

This was followed by written instructions from Alexander 
Hamilton, Secretary of the- Treasury, to the collectors of the 
customs, requiring " the greatest vigilance, care, activity, 
and impartiality," in searching for and discovering any at- 
tempt to fit out vessels and expeditions,. or send men, to the 
aid of either party (ibid. 140) ; and so strict were these re- 
quirements that Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State, the 
great champion of neutrality, was compelled to denounce 
them as "setting up a system of espionage destructive to the 
peace of society." (Jeff. Works, vol. 9, 556 ; 3 ib. 556.) 
While Mr. Jefferson declared in Cabinet Council (9 Jeff. 



IS THE ALABAMA A BRITISH PIRATE? 13 

W. 154), " It is inconsistent for a nation which has been pa- 
tiently hearing for ten years the grossest insults and injuries 
from their late enemies, to rise at a feather against their 
friends and benefactors ; and at a moment, too, when cir- 
cumstances have kindled the most ardent affections of the 
two people towards each other ;" he still wrote to the French 
representative, M. Ternant, demanding the cessation of the 
fitting out of certain privateers in Charleston (3 JefT. 561) ; 
and to his successor, Citizen Genet (whom we afterwards 
sent home for endeavoring to make use of our harbors for 
such illegal purposes), u The fitting out of armed vessels 
against nations with whom we are at peace " is " instrumen- 
tal to the annoyance of those nations, and thereby tends to , 
compromit their peace/' and " it is the duty of a neutral na- 
tion to prohibit such acts as would injure one of the warring 
parties." (Ibid. 571.) 

One of the first cases demanding action by the government 
was that of the Little Sarah. Upon the suggestion by Mr. 
Hammond, the British representative, that she was being 
fitted as a French privateer, she was seized, and being found 
to contain a suspicious armament, was prevented from sail- 
ing. About the same time the British ship Grange was 
taken in American waters by the French war vessel l'Embus- 
cade. The act was considered a breach of our sovereignt} T , 
and the prize seized and restored to her British owners. Nu- 
merous prizes were, on proof that the capturing vessels had 
been fitted out in the United States, restored to their own- 
ers. The government did not wait for action by the British 
representative, but held its own officers to the duty of vigi- 
lance. The governors of the states were frequently called 
upon to arrest vessels about departing (Hamilton's W., vol. 
2, 463). In one case we find this language used : 

"The case in question is that of a vessel armed, equipped, and 
manned, in a port of the United States for the purpose of committing 
hostilities on a nation at peace with us. 

" As soon as it was perceived that such enterprises would be attempted, 
orders to prevent them were despatched to all the states and ports of the 
Union. In consequence of these the governor of New York, receiv- 
ing information that a sloop heretofore called the Folly, now the Ke- 
puhlican, was fitting, arming, and manning, to cruise against a nation 
with whom we were at peace, seized the vessel." 

The President, being apprized, ordered her and the per- 
sons engaged to be delivered over to the tribunals for pun- 



14 ENGLISH NEUTRALITY. 

ishment. (3 Jeff. W. 386.) Such seizures were frequently- 
made, the government entering into it as a matter of honor, 
not appearing to suppose that its 'duty would be performed 
by sitting coldly by until the British minister under all the 
embarrassments of being a stranger, should produce irrefrag- 
able proof of infractions of its own laws. Gen. "Washington 
seems to have considered it a shameful and humiliating ex- 
cuse for a government to plead that it u is ignorant of what 
is carried on daily and repeatedly in its own country." It was 
impossible, however, with our limited navy, to prevent entire- 
ly such expeditions, and at last, at the risk of a war with 
our friend, it was resolved in Cabinet Council, on the 15th 
of August, 1793, " That the Minister of the French Repub- 
lic be informed that the President considers the United States 
as bound by positive assurances given in conformity to the 
laws of neutrality, to effectuate the restoration of, or make 
compensation for prizes which shall have been made of any 
of the parties at war with France, subsequent to the 5th day 
of June last, by privateers fitted out in their ports. That it 
is consequently expected that he will cause restitution to be 
made of all prizes taken and brought into our ports subsequent 
to the above-mentioned day by such privateers ; in defect of 
which the President considers it incumbent upon the United 
States to indemnify the oioners of those prizes ; the indem- 
nification to be reimbursed by the French nation." (4 Hamil- 
ton's Works, 468.) At the same time Mr. Jefferson's im- 
portant letter to Mr. Hammond was written.* 



* Philadelphia, September 5, 1793. 

Sir: — I am honored with yours of August 30th; mine of the 7th of that month 
assured that measures were taken for excluding from all further asylum in our ports, 
vessels armed in them to cruise on nations with which we are at "peace, and for the 
restoration of the prizes, the " Lovely Lass, " "Prince William," " Henry, " and the 
"Jane, of Dublin; and should the measures for restitution fail in their effect, the 
President considered it as incumbent^n the United States to make compensation for the 
vessels. 

We are bound by our treaties with three of the belligerent nations, by all the 
means in our power to protect and defend their vessels and effects in our ports, 
or waters or on the seas near our shores, and to recover and restore the same to the 
right owners, when taken from them. If all the means in onr power are used, and 
fail in their effect, we are not bound by our treaties with those nations to make com- 
pensation. 

Though wa have no similar treaty with Great Britain, it was the opinion of the Presi- 
dent that we should use toward that nation the same rule, which, under this article, 
was to govern us with the other nations ; and even to extend it to captures made on 
the high seas and brought into our ports; if done by vessels which had been at war 
with them. 

Having, for particular reasons, forborne to use all the means in our power for the 
restitution of the three vessels mentioned in my letter of August 7th, the President 
thought it incumbent on the United States to made compensation for them. And 
though nothing was said in that letter of other vessels taken under like circumstances 



IS THE ALABAMA A BRITISH PIRATE? 15 

The basis of this voluntary action of our government was, 
that sound maxim of the law of nations, that a state is 
prima facie responsible for whatever is done within its juris- 
diction, since it must be presumed to be capable of preventing 
or punishing offences committed within its boundaries ; and 
that a body politic is, therefore, responsible for the acts of 
individuals which are acts of actual or meditated hostility 
towards a nation, with which the government of these sub- 
jects professes to maintain relations of friendship or neu- 
trality. (3 Phillimore's International Law, 218 ; Grotius, 
1. ii., c. 21, § 2; Puffendorf, 1. i., c. 5, § ult.) In the 
year following, upon the application of England, and for her 
better protection (Canning's Speeches, vol. 4, pp. 152-3, 
Abr. Debates in Congress, vol 7), we passed the act of 1794 ; 
and lastly, and most important to be remembered when the 
day of settlement comes, we, in that year, entered into a treaty 
of amity and commerce with her, by which, o'n her demand, 

and brought in after the 5th of June, and before the date of that letter, yet when 
the same forbearance had taken place, it was and is his opinion that compensation 
will be equally due. 

As to prizes made under the same circumstances, and brought in after the date of 
that letter, the President determined that all the means in our power should be used 
for their restitution. If these fail, as we should not be bound by our treaties to make 
compensation to the other powers in the analogous case, he did not mean to irive an 
opinion that it ought to be done to Great Britain. But still, if any cases shall arise 
subsequent to that date, the circumstances of which shall place them on similar ground 
with those before it, the President would think compensation equally incumbent on the 
United States. 

Instructions are given to the governors of the different states to use all the means in 
their power for restoring prizes of this last description, found within their ports. 
Though they will, of course, take measures to be informed of them, and the general 
government has given them the aid of the custom-house officers for this purpose, yet 
you will be sensible of the importance of multiplying the channels of their information 
as far as shall depend on yourself, or any person under your direction, in order that the 
governors may use the means in their power for making restitution. 

Without knowledge of the capture they cannot restore it. It will always be best 
to give the notice to them directly ; but any information which you shall be pleased to 
send me, also, at any time, shall be forwarded to them as quickly as distance will 
permit. 

Hence you will perceive, sir, that the President contemplates restitution or compen- 
sation in the case before the 7th of August ; and after that date restitution if it can be 
affected by any means in our power ; and that it will be important you should substan- 
tiate the facts, that snch prizes are in our ports or waters. 

Your list of the privateers illicitly in our ports, is, I believe, correct. 

With respect to losses by detention, waste, spoliation, sustained by vessels taken as 
before-mentioned, between the dates of June 5th and August 7th, it is proposed, as a 

frovisional measure, that the collector of the customs of the district, and the British 
ousul or any other person you please, shall appoint persons to establish the value of 
the vessel and cargo at the time of her capture and of her arrival in the port into which 
she is brought, according to their value in that port. If this shall be agreeable to you, 
and you will be pleased to signify it to me, with the names of the prizes understood to 
be of this description, instruction will be given accordingly, to the collector of the cus- 
toms where the respective vessels are. 

I have the honor to be, &c. 

Thomas Jefferson. 
Geobge Hammond, Esq. 



16 ENGLISH NEUTRALITY. 

we undertook to pay to her and Tier citizens all losses suffered 
by armed vessels fitted out in our ports .* 

Our conduct during this whole period received, and still 
receives, the commendation of all enlightened publicists. 
Phillimore and Ward are profuse in their praise of the jus- 
tice, dignity, and intelligence, which marked the action of this 
government ; and George Canning lost no opportunity in 
Parliament to urge an emulation of our example. In the 
debates, upon Lord Althorpe's petition for the repeal of the 
Foreign Enlistment Act (Hansard's Pari. ^Debates N. S., vol. 
8, pp> 1019-59, Canning's Speeches, vol. 4, pp. 152-3), 
he said : 

" It surely could not be forgotten, that, in 1794, this country com- 
plained of various breaches of neutrality (though much inferior to 
those now under consideration), committed on the part of subjects of 
the United States. What was the conduct of that nation in conse- 
quence ? Did she resent the complaint as an infringement of her in- 
dependence ? Did it refuse to take such steps as would insure the imme- 
diate observance of neutrality f Neither. In 1794, immediately after 
the application from the British government, the legislature . of the 
United States passed an act, prohibiting, under heavy penalties, the 
engagement of American citizens in the armies of any foreign powers, f 
Was that the only instance of the kind ? It was but last year (18 1 8) 
that the United States passed an act, by which the act of 1794 was 
confirmed in every respect, again prohibiting the engagement of their 
citizens in the service of any foreign powers ; and pointing distinctly 
to the service of Spain or the South American provinces." 

He might have added, had he spoken at a later period, 
that in 1838 we again, upon the request of Great Britain, 
called in legislative aid ; this time to prevent .succor to the 
Canadian rebellion. Again, in 1823, he'* said (Canning's 
Speeches, vol. 5, pp. 50-1) : 

" If I wished for a 'guide in a system of neutrality, I wonld take 
that laid down by America in the days of the presidency of Wash- 

* Extract from 7th article of treaty of 1794: "And whereas, certain merchants and 
others, his majesty's subjects, complain that in the course of the war they have sus- 
tained loss and damage by reason of the capture of their vessels and merchandise, 
taken wilhin the limits and jurisdiction of the States, and brought into the ports qf 
the same, or taken by vessels originally armed in the ports of the said /States. It is 
agreed, that in all cases where restitution shall not have been made agreeably to the 
tenor of the letter from Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Hammond, of September 5th, 1793, the 
complaints of the parties shall be referred to the commissioners hereby appointed," 
&c, &c. 

f It was because we stood by this very act, and would not permit Mr. Crampton to 
infringe it b}' recruiting for the war against Russia, that we were pressed almost to the 
point of hostilities in 1855. 



18 THE ALABAMA A BEITISH PIRATE ? 17 

ington and the secretaryship of Jefferson. Here, sir," he added, 
after stating what we had done, " I contend, is the principle on which 
we ought to act." 

After the treaty of 1794, the efforts of our government to 
prevent infractions of its neutrality were still increased. 

In 1803 (President's Message, Oct. 17), Mr. Jefferson 
said : 

" We have seen, with sincere concern, the flames of war lighted 
up again in Europe ; and nations, with which we have the most 
friendly and useful relations, engaged in mutual destruction. * * * 
In the course of this conflict, let it be our endeavor, as it is our in- 
terest, to cultivate the friendship of the belligerent nations by every 
act of justice and innocent kindness ; to receive their armed vessels with 
hospitality from the distresses of the sea ; but to administer the means 
of annoyance to none ; to establish in our harbors such a police as 
may maintain law and order ; to restrain our citizens from embark- 
ing, individually, in a war, in which their country has no part, and 
to punish severely those persons, citizen or alien, who usurp our flag not 
entitled to it."* 

In 1805, still greater vigor was announced. Mr. Jeffer- 
son, in the annual message of that year, says, after reci- 
ting certain infractions of our neutrality and sovereignty : 

"These enormities appearing to be unreached by any control of 
their sovereigns, I found it necessary to equip a force, to cruise within 
our own seas, to arrest all vessels of this description found hovering 
on our coasts within the limits of the Gulf Stream, and to bring in 
the offenders for trial as pirates." (Am. State Pap., For. Rel., vol. 
1, p. 66.) 

In 1817, Spain was engaged in a contest with her colonies. 
The proximity of the scene of conflict, the sympathy which 
our people naturally held with the struggling colonies, and 
the adventurous character of our seamen, all combined to 
make interference feasible and attractive. Many attempts 
were made, the better to prevent which, we passed the act 
of 1818, alluded to by Mr. Canning. A voluminous corre- 
spondence took place between Don Luis de Onis, the Spanish 
minister, and the State Department, touching these arma- 
ments, a critical examination of which will show that the 
charges now constantly made by the English press, that our 

* It is well known that the " Alabama " usually approaches her victims under the 
English flag; see papers in the matter of the "Brilliant, "published by the New York 
Chamber of Commerce, 1862. 

2 



18 ENGLISH NEUTRALITY. 

government was derelict at that time, are not well founded.* 
Some vessels escaped, perhaps, in spite 'of our vigilance. 
One case, which occurred in Baltimore, has been related to 
me by a gentleman who was cognizant of the fact. A sus- 
pected vessel had been seized, and, to prevent her going to 
sea before the matter could be investigated, her sails were 
taken from her and packed in a warehouse. After a time, 
the captain, who persistently asserted his innocence, asked 
permission to take the sails to spread them for drying, they 
being in danger of mildew. The port officer, a confiding, 
and not over-shrewd person, consented, and in the night the 
vessel slipped away, leaving the simple official to make the 
best settlement with his government that he could. Upon 
the final adjustment of the respective claims between Spain 
and the United States, it was not denied by us that we were 
liable to make compensation to sufferers by armed vessels, 
which we might have stopped ; but, on the contrary, we 
took from Spain a release from all claims of this character, 
as part of the consideration for the concessions which we then 
made. (Treaty with Spain, 1819.) And on Dec. 7th, 1819, 
President Monroe declared to the world (annual message), 
referring to Spanish matters : 

"It is gratifying to have it in my power to state, so strong has 
been the sense throughout the whole community of what is due to the 
character and obligations of the nation, that very few examples of a 
contrary kind have occurred." 

* The Spanish minister complained to our government that hostile expeditions were 
being fitted out in Louisiana, to aid the insurrectionary parties in South America. The 
complaint was immediately referred to the proper person, in New Orleans, and the 
result was, that our own officers were set to work, without Spanish aid, and succeeded 
in breaking up almost entirety the system. 

Many persons were prosecuted and seven vessels seized, on which, three being found 
guilty, were condemned. Nine or ten prizes were libelled and restored to their Spanish 
owners, on the ground that the capturing vessels had been fitted out and armed, or 
had their forces augmented in the waters of the United States. Mr. Dick, the United 
States District Attorney, says, "It is notorious, that to no one point of duty have the 
civil and military authorities of the United States more strenuously, or, it is believed, 
more successfully, devoted their attention, than to the discovering and suppressing all 
attempts to violate the laws in this respect. Such attempts have never been success- 
ful, except when conducted under circumstances of concealment that eluded discovery 
and almost suspicion; or when carried on at some remote point of the coast, beyond 
the reach of detection or discover}'. In every instance where it was known that 
these illegal acts were attempting, or where it was afterwards discovered that they 
had been committed, the persons engaged, so far as they were known, were prosecuted, 
while the vessels fitted out, or attempted to be fitted out, have been seized and libelled, 
under the act of oth June, 1794; and when captures have been made by vessels thus 
fitted and armed, and their force augmented in our waters, and the prizes brought with- 
in our waters, or even found upon the high seas by our cruisers, they have been restored to 
the Spanish owner, and in some instances damages awarded against the captors." Niles' 
Reg., p. 63. 



IS THE ALABAMA A BKITISH PIKATE ? 19 

In 1838, our government was again zealous in the enforce- 
ment of what had by this time become its traditional policy ; 
and used its most vigorous efforts in endeavoring to prevent 
all interference by our people in the disturbances then exist- 
ing in Canada. In an official letter, Mr. Webster says : 

"The President directs me to say that it is his fixed resolution that 
all such disturbers of the public peace and violators of the laws of 
their country shall be brought to exemplary punishment. ," (Webster's 
Works, vol. C, p. 2C0.) 

In the same volume Mr. Webster refers to the fixed Amer- 
ican doctrine on this subject, especially the practice of direct- 
ing our officers to watch for infringements of neutrality, with- 
out waiting for information, and cites the instructions given 
our army during the war for Texan independence. (Ibid, 
p. 452.) 

The next occasion on which Great Britain, by taking a 
belligerent attitude, forced upon us the embarrassment and 
annoyance of the neutral character, was during the war with 
Russia, in 1854-6. It has been very loosely charged that, at 
that time, armaments for Russia were permitted to go on 
here, and that some war-vessels intended for that nation es- 
caped. The best investigation which I have been able to give 
to that period fails to discover any vessel which can be traced 
to the Russians, or which ever caused, or attempted to cause, 
damage to the other belligerents. During that war, much 
excitement was caused in England by the announcement that 
the barque Maury, of New York, belonging to a highly respect- 
able mercantile firm (the owners of the Jacob Bell, lately 
burned by the Florida), had been detected in shipping arms 
to the enemy, and had been seized. The real truth about 
that matter seems never yet to have reached the British 
public. The facts were, that the barque was openly advertised 
for China, and was loading on freight. She was seized on 
the application of the British consul, sustained by very sus- 
picious affidavits. An examination of her cargo, &c, proved 
her innocence, and the consul made a public apology in the 
columns of the New York Herald of October 24, 1855, for the 
seizure.* The owners did not let the matter rest, however, 



* The following letter will show the motives and the promptness with which our 
government then acted : 

Attorney-General's Office, 22c? October, 1855. 

Sir: — I have received your letter of the 19th instant, communicating the result of 
inquiry regarding the barque "Maury." 



20 ENGLISH NEUTRALITY. 

but procured an investigation by the New York Chamber of 
Commerce, a committee of which body, composed of gentle- 
men whose probity cannot be doubted, reported, among other 
things : 

" The committee have it from the highest authority, that the gov- 
ernment has no knowledge, belief, or suspicion, that any privateer or 
other armed vessel is fitting out, or has been fitted out, in this coun- 
try, for or against any of the European belligerents."* (Report on 
Seizure of the Barque Maury, N. Y. Chamb. Com., 1855.) 

The allegation against that vessel was improbable on its face ; but, determined as 
the President is not to suffer any of the belligerent powers to trespass on the neutral 
rights of the United States, it was deemed proper to investigate the case, out of respect 
for the British minister, through whom the British consul at New York, preferred com- 
plaint in the premises. 

It is made manifest, by the documents which j'ou transmit, that the suspicions of 
the British consul as to the character and destination of the "Maurv," were wholly 
erroneous ; and justice to her owners and freighters requires that the libel against her 
be dismissed. 

I have the honor to be, 

Very respectfully, 

C. Cushing. 
Hon. John McKeon, 

Attorney of United States, New York. 

* At the same time the Chamber of Commerce passed the following resolutions which 
they justly claimed as expressing the universal sentiment of the American public : 

"1. Resolved, That the Chamber of Commerce of New York receive and adopt the 
report, as a correct statement, and as containing the sense of this body on the 
subject. 

" 2. Resolved, That no proper amends or apology have been made to A. A. Low & 
Brothers, for the charge brought against them, which, if true, would have rendered 
them infamous; nor to the merchants of this city and country, so falsely and injuri- 
ously assailed. 

"3. Resolved, That the merchants of New York, as part of the body of merchants of 
the United States, will uphold the government in the full maintenance of the neutrality 
laws of the country ; and we acknowledge and adopt, and always have regarded, the 
acts of the United States for preserving its neutrality, as binding in honor and con- 
science, as well as in law ; and that we denounce those who violate them as disturbers 
of the peace of the world, to be held in universal abhorrence. 

It would be impossible to illustrate the difference of conduct on the part of England and 
America, better than by printing side by side the papers in the cases of the " Maury" and the " Ala- 
bama." That cannot be done here for want of space, but substantially the facts were as f jllows : 

The British consul through the British Minister gave notice to our government that " a person 
(name not given) , who deponent believes to be in the pay of Kussia, has given him a full expla- 
nation of the armament on board the said vessel ;'' . . . . also, that this deponent "gathered 
from the person in question that the said ' Maury' would, when outside, ship a new crew of about 
eighty men," &c, to go in pursuit of the Cunard steamers. This statement of the consul's was 
backed by the affidavits of two policemen, who swore upon information and belief that the vessel 
was fitted out as a Russian privateer, but stated no other information or ground of belief than 
she had taken on board 6ome cannon, small arms, and cannon ball, and that the mate said that it 
was a " damned queer cargo" for the China Seas. Our government, as appears by Mr. Cushing's 
letter, considered "the allegation against the vessel as improbable on its face," but still ordered 
it to be seized and held until the truth could be ascertained. The seizure of the vessel was the 
first notice to the owners that any suspicion of her was entertained ; and they immediately made 
a full and frank statement concerning her, by which and the subsequent investigation it appeared 
that she was loading on freight for China ; that there was nothing peculiar about her rig or build ; 
and that the cannon were shipped on freight to an American gentleman in Canton ; and that the 
addition to her armament of two guns was on account of the increasing danger from Chinese 
pirates. The libel was after these explanations " lifted," with the consent of the counsel for the 
British consul. 

The distinguishing features of this case are the promptness with which the vessel was seized 
and held until the suspicions against her should be removed; and the readiness of the owners to 
give all information concerning her. 

In the case of the " Alabama," as has been shown, the British government refused to interfer 



IS THE ALABAMA A BRITISH PIRATE ? 21 

The case of the Grand Admiral is another frequently al- 
luded to by the British press, and it is only necessary to say 
that this ship was ordered by the Kussian government before 
the outbreak of hostilities ; that its construction was sus- 
pended during the whole of the war ; and that she did not 
sail from this country until 1859, three years after peace was 
declared. (See letter of W. H. Webb, Esq., published by 
N. Y. Chamb. of Com., 1863.) 

The purchase and clearance of the steamship " United 
States" is now being made use of by those English journals 
which are conducted in the interest of the rebellion, to 
justify, by an American precedent, the piratical enterprises 
in which British merchants are now engaged. In this, as in 
all the other cases, an American may well say : • 

11 Mark, now, how plain a tale shall put you down." 

In 1848, an attempt was made to consolidate the German 
people into one government. The new government sent com- 
missioners to this country to purchase some steam war-ves- 
sels. The commissioners addressed our government, openly 
through the German minister, and the President, in courtesy, 
granted the services of some of our naval officers to aid in 
the selection, and the use of our navy-yard, for the refitting 
of the steamer in question. While this was going on, the 
government at Washington were informed that the purchas- 
ers of this steamer were in some way parties to. a petty con- 
troversy, then progressing/under the name of the Schleswig- 
Holstein war. Upon receipt of this information, all facili- 
ties for finishing the vessel were at once withdrawn, and it 
was only after a long negotiation that she was permitted to 
sail, without arms, with just men enough to take her across 
the Atlantic ; and only after having given bonds in $900,000 
that she should never be used against any nation with whom 



with the freedom of the suspected vessel until proof sufficient to convict her was produced, and by 
their captiousness and delay gave her plenty of time to get away before any proceedings could be 
instituted; and meanwhile her owners, though admitting that she was a war-vessel built for a 
foreign government, refused to give any further information about her. 

One of the affidavits presented to the Board of Customs and Lord Russell, was that of William 
Passmore, who swore he had been engaged by Capt. Butcher to sail in the " 290," with the ex- 
press understanding that she was going to fight for the " government of the Confederate States 
of America." That he had joined the vessel in Messrs. Laird & Co.'s yard at Birkenhead, and re- 
mained on her several days. That he found about thirty old men-of-war's men on board, among 
whom it was "well known that she was going out as a privateer for the Confederate government 
to act against the United States, under a commission from Mr. Jefferson Davis." 

Yet, this affidavit, proving, prima facie, as it does the character of the vessel, was, with others 
sustaining it, in the hands of English officials for at least ten days before f hey were able to deter- 
mine whether they should take the precaution of holding the vessel to abide the event of examin- 
ation. Nor has any action yet been taken against Capt. Butcher for a criminal infringement of 
the 2d section of 59 Geo. III. , which, under severe penalties, forbids the hiring or enlisting any 
man to serve against a friendly nation. 

The distinguishing features of this case do not require to be pointed out. 



22 ENGLISH NEUTRALITY. 

we were at peace. She reached Liverpool, and there remained 
until peace was declared, and, shortly after, was changed 
into a passenger-ship, and plied between this port and Gal- 
way, as the " Indian Empire." (Letter of Leopold Bier- 
with, Esq., pub. by N. Y. Cham, of Com. 1863.) 

Thus stands the record of American neutrality. History 
may be fairly challenged to show another instance of such 
magnanimity, consistency, and fairness. 

Should we examine thoroughly the record of Great Britain 
upon this matter of maritime neutrality, it would be found 
entirely consistent on one point — "Britannia rules the 
wave." To express the probable reasons for whatever in- 
consistencies on other points history might discover, would 
necessitate harsh allusions to that national greed and arro- 
gance which the traditions of mankind have ascribed to the 
insular kingdom. And since it is not the purpose of this 
discussion to revive memories of past misconduct, but in- 
stead, to discover the true, legal, and moral obligations which 
bind nations as they may be derived from instances of past 
good conduct, it will be necessary to cite but two cases — and 
those the most notable — in which Great Britain has been 
called upon to declare her understanding of what true 
neutrality consists in. It will be seen that in one case she 
demands, and in the other performs, neutrality. 

The first instance has special relation to rebellion, being 
the protest of England against the clandestine assistance 
which France permitted her citizens to give the revolted 
American colonies, or rather her statement of reasonsy'ustify- 
ing ivar upon France for that cause. The written state- 
ment of these just grounds of war is found in the celebrated 
Memoire Justificatif, understood to .have been prepared for 
the king by the historian Gibbon. But for the proper names 
and dates there given, one might suppose that Mr. Gibbon, 
with prophetic foresight, had prepared this document for 
presentation by Mr. Adams to the English government of 
the present day.* 

* The following extracts are made from the Memoire Justificatif, which maybe 
found printed in full in the British Annual Register for 1779, vol. xxii., p. 404. 

"An enterprise so vain and so difficult as that of hiding from the eyes of Great Britain 
and of all Europe the proceedings of a commercial company associated for furnishing 
the Americans with whatever could nourish and maintain the tire of a revolt, was not 
attempted. The informed public named the chief of the enterprise, whose house was 
established at Paris ; his correspondents at Dunkirk, Nantz, and Bordeaux, were equally 



IS THE ALABAMA A BRITISH PIRATE ? 23 

The instance selected to show to what length Great Brit- 
ain feels herself bound to go in the performance of neutral 
obligations relates to the conflict between Donna Maria and 
Don Miguel for the crown of Portugal. In 1827, Don Pedro, 
having retained to himself the empire of the Brazils, formal- 
ly renounced the throne of Portugal in favor of his daugh- 
ter, Donna Maria, and appointed his brother, Don Miguel, 
regent of the kingdom. Donna Maria was recognized by 
Great Britain and all the great powers as the lawful sover- 
eign of Portugal. In 1828, however, Don Miguel induced 

known. The immense magazines which they formed, and which they replenished 
every day, were laden in ships that they built or bought, and the}' scarcely dissembled 
their objects or the place of their destination. These vessels commonly took false 
clearances for the French islands in America, but the commodities which composed their 
cargoes were sufficient before the time of their sailing to discover the fraud and artifice. 
These suspicions were quickly confirmed by the course they held, and at the end of a 
few weeks it was not surprising to hear they had fallen into the hands of the king's 
officers cruising in the American seas, who took them even within sight of the coasts 
of the revolted colonies. This vigilance was but too well justified by the conduct of 
those who had the luck or cunning to escape it, since the}' approached America only 
to deliver to the rebels the arms and ammunition which the}' had taken on board for 
their service. The marks of these facts, which could be considered only as manifest 
breaches of the faith of treaties, multiplied continually, and the diligence of the king's 
ambassador to communicate his complaint and proofs to the court of Versailles, did not 
leave him the shameful and humiliating resource of appearing ignorant of what was 
carried on and daily repeated In the very heart of the country. He pointed out the 
names, number, and quality of the ships that the commercial agents of America had 
fitted out in the ports of France, to carry to the rebels arms, warlike stores, and even 
French officers who had engaged in the service of the revolted colonies. The dates, 
places, and persons, were always specified with a precision that afforded the ministers of 
his most Christian majesty the greatest facility of being assured of these reports, and 
of stopping in time the progress of these illicit armaments. Among a crowd of ex- 
amples which accuse the court of Versailles of want of attention to fulfil the conditions 
of peace, or rather its constant attention to nourish fear and discord, it is impossible to 
enumerate them all — it is very difficult to select the most striking objects. 

" Nine large ships, fitted out and freighted by the Sieur de Beaumarchais and his part- 
ners, in the month of January, 1777, are not confounded with the Amphitrite, which 
carried about the same time a great quantity of ammunition and thirty French officers, 
who passed with impunity into the service of the rebels. Every month, almost every 
day, furnished new subjects of complaint; and a short memorial that Viscount Stor- 
mont, the king's ambassador, communicated to the Count de Vergennes in the month of 
November in same year, will give a just but very imperfect idea of the wrongs which 
Britain had so often sustained. 

"There is a sixty-sun ship at Rockport, and an East India ship, pierced for sixty 
guns, at L'Orient. These two ships are destined for the service of the rebels. They 
are laden with different merchandise, and freighted by Messrs. Cleaumont, Holken & 
Lebatier. The ship L'Henreux sailed from Marseilles the 26th of September under 
another name ; she goes straight to New Hampshire, though it is pretended she is 
bound to the French Islands. They have been permitted to take on board three thou- 
sand muskets and twenty-five thousand pounds of sulphur — a merchandise as necessary 
to the Americans as useless to the islands. This ship is commanded by M. Lundi, a 
French officer of distinction, formerly lieutenant to M. de Bouganville. L'Hippopo- 
tame, belonging to the Sieur Beaumarchais, will have on board four thousand muskets 
and man}' warlike stores for the use of the rebels. There are about fifty French ships 
laden with ammunition for the use of the rebels, preparing to sail to North America, 
They will go from Nantz, L'Orient, St. Malo, Havre, Bordeaux, Bayonne, and other 
different ports. These are the names of some of the persons principally interested, M. 
Cleaumont, M. Menton,"&c, &c. 

" In this kingdom, where the will of the prince meets with no obstacle, succors so con- 
siderable, so public, so long supported, in fine, so necessary to maintain the war in 



24 ENGLISH NETJTKALITY. 

a revolt, procured himself to be proclaimed king, and suc- 
ceeded in expelling the queen and her friends from most of 
her dominions. Terceira, one of the Azore Islands, re- 
mained faithful to her and in her possession. The Brazilian 
envoy at London applied to the British government for as- 
sistance, on the ground that the queen was the legitimate 
sovereign and Don Miguel a usurper. These facts were ad- 
mitted by Lord Aberdeen, who refused assistance, however, 
assigning as the reason that, as England could not take 
notice of the merits of the domestic quarrels of another 
country, she must therefore conduct herself between the two 
according to the strict rule of duty governing neutral nations. 



America, show clearly enough the most secret intentions of the most Christian king's 
ministers. But they still carried further their forgetfulness or contempt of the most 
solemn engagements, and it was not without their permission that an underhand and 
dangerous war issued from the ports of France under the deceitful mask of peace and 
the pretended flag of the American colonies. The favorable reception that their agents 
found with the ministers of the court of Versailles, quickly encouraged them to form 
and execute the audacious project of establishing a place of arms in the country which 
had served them for an asylum. They had brought with them, or knew how to fabri- 
cate, letters of marque in the name of the American Congress, who had the impudence 
to usurp all the rights of sovereignty. The partnership, whose interested views easily 
embarked in all their designs, fitted out ships that they had either built or purchased. 
They armed them to cruise in the European seas ; nay, even on the coasts of Great 
Britain. To save appearances, the captains of those corsairs hoisted the pretended 
American flag, but their crews were always composed of a great number of Frenchmen, 
who entered with impunity under the very eyes of their governors and the officers of 
the maritime provinces. And numerous swarms of these corsairs, animated by a sport 
of rapine, sailed from the ports of France, and after cruising in the British seas, re-en- 
tered or took shelter in the same ports. * * * * 
* * * * * * * 

"To the first representation of the king's ambassadors upon the subject of the priva- 
teers which were fitted out in the ports of France under American colors, the ministers 
of his most Christian majesty replied, with expressions of surprise and indignation, 
and by a positive declaration that attempts so contrary to the faith of treaties and the 
public tranquillity should never be suffered. The train of events, of which a small 
number hath been shown, soon manifested the inconstancy, or rather the falsehood, 
of the court of Versailles ; and the king's ambassador was ordered to represent to the 
French ministers the serious but inevitable consequences of their policy. He fulfilled 
his commission with all the consideration due to a respectable power, the preservation 
of whose friendship was desired, but with a friendship worthy of sovereign, and a 
nation little accustomed to do or to suffer injustice. The court of Versailles was called 
upon to explain its conduct and intentions without delay or evasion, and the king pro- 

Eosed to it the alternative of peace or war. France chose peace, in order to wound 
er enemy more surely and secretly, without having anything to dread from her jus- 
tice. She severely condemned those succors and those armaments, that the principles 
of public equity would not permit her to justifj'-. She declared to the king's ambas- 
sador that she was resolved to banish the American corsairs immediately from all the 
ports of France, never to return again ; and that she would take, in future, the most 
rigorous precautions to prevent the sale of prizes taken from the subjects of Great Brit- 
ain. The orders given to that effect astonished the partisans of the rebels, and 
seemed to check the progress of the evil ; but subjects of complaint sprung up again 
daily ; and the manner in which these orders were first eluded, then violated, and at 
length entirely forgotten by the merchants, privateers, nay, even by the royal 
officers, were not excusable by the protestations of friendship, with which the court 
of Versailles accompanied those infractions of peace, until the very-moment that 
the treat}' of alliance, which it had signed with the agents of the revolted American 
colonies, was announced by the French ambassador in London." 



IS THE ALABAMA A BRITISH PIRATE? 25 

About this time a number of Portuguese refugees arrived in 
England and took up their residence in Portsmouth. It was 
suspected (I quote the language of Phillimore) that they 
were meditating to fit out some expedition from these ports 
against Don Miguel, and the government, holding that to 
permit this would be a breach of neutrality, informed the 
Brazilian minister that it would allow no such design to be 
carried on in British harbors, and that, for security's sake, 
the refugees must remove farther from the coast. The en- 
voy stated that those troops were about to be conveyed to 
Brazil, and accordingly four vessels, having on board six 
hundred and twenty-five unarmed men, sailed from Ply- 
mouth. The government suspected that the true design was 
to land these troops on Terceira, and, having given them 
notice before they sailed that any such attempt would be re- 
sisted, dispatched a fleet of armed vessels to watch and pre- 
vent a landing. The expedition appeared off Terceira, and, 
being perceived by the English captain, was fired into and 
stopped, one man being killed. The Portuguese commander 
insisted upon his right to disembark upon the loyal territory 
of his sovereign, but being unarmed was unable to enforce 
his right, and his whole expedition was conducted several 
hundred miles to sea and there left, the English fleet return- 
ing to stand guard at the island. This act caused great ex- 
citement in England, and in Parliament the questions of in- 
ternational law involved were discussed with much ability. 
The government defended itself on the ground " that the 
refugees had fitted out a warlike armament in a British port ; 
that the armament, having been equipped under the dis- 
guise of going to Brazil, had not been stopped before sail- 
ing ; and that they were therefore bound, by the duty of neu- 
trality, to prevent by force an armament so equipped from 
disembarking, even in the Queen of Portugal's dominions." 
The government was supported by a majority in both houses 
of Parliament. (Br. Annual Kegister for 1829 ; 3 Philli., 
229.) 

Thus we have, by a fair examination of the customary law of 
nations, and the general conduct thereunder of England and 
America respectively, arrived at a point from which we may 
look about us and obtain a tolerably clear view of the legal 
conclusions and consequences which follow and belong to the 
unneutral acts of permitting the initial departure, the con- 
tinued depredations, subsequent return, refitting, and de- 



26 ENGLISH NEUTRALITY. 

parture of the Alabama and Florida from British ports. 
From this general view we perceive, as a matter of law, that 
neutrals are bound at all hazards to prevent, among other 
things, the fitting out in their dominions of warlike expedi- 
tions and armaments against either belligerent ; we see also, 
from the law, and practice of Great Britain in other cases, 
that all facilities for this purpose exist in that kingdom, and 
that they may be and have been employed by the authorities 
of their own motion ; and we gather, from the spirit and 
language of the Memoire Justijicatif, that, in 1779, Great 
Britain considered that the practice of casting upon the 
representatives of the offended belligerent — strangers in the 
land — all the burden of proving the guilty character of such 
enterprises before any intervention of the neutral government 
can be obtained, is but little better than a fraudulent eva- 
sion of international duties. We gather also that America, in 
1793, and at all times since, lias acted in good faith upon the 
same opinion, always interposing at the request of foreign 
powers and requiring its own officers to be vigilant and posi- 
tive in the effort to detect and suppress unneutral prepara- 
tions ; and that as between this nation and Great Britain the 
latter has demanded and Ave have always rendered the fullest 
and freest performance of neutral obligations. It is also seen 
that by reason and usage the failure of a neutral nation to 
perform in good faith, and to the best of its ability, its obli- 
gations in this respect, is deemed to sustain a claim for com- 
pensation for all pecuniary damage growing out of its derelic- 
tions : and even to justify reprisals and absolute war. 

Yet, notwithstanding all this, we find that Great Britain 
has permitted, within her harbors and domain, the fitting 
out of armaments notoriously intended to cruise against our 
commerce ; and that the hostile armament has been permitt( d 
to sail unopposed from English shores upon its criminal 
business of lighting up the seas with burning merchant- 
men, days after the government had been in possession 
of what itself admitted to be sufficient proof of its clan- 
destine character. Indeed, on the contrary from the Ala- 
bama being opposed, it is stated by the press, that the 
officials of the " circumlocution office," in the prosecu- 
tion of the great business of " How not to do it," de- 
cided upon the value of a breach of the law of nations, by 
receiving a bond of twenty thousand pounds as the consid- 
eration, and indemnification for permitting the Alabama 
to proceed to sea, thus making the British nation a partner 



IS TIIE ALABAMA A BRITISH TIKATE ? 27 

in lier crimes and surety for all her acts of pecuniary dam- 
age. And the only excuse for this unprecedented fraud is 
drawn from the state of a queen's advocate's digestion ; na- 
tional honor, international justice, and the peace of great 
nations bound up Avith the bandages of Sir John D. Hard- 
ing's gouty toe ! Moreover, although the culprit deiies Eng- 
lish revenue laws by sailing without a clearance ; and al- 
though the true nature of her voyage is soon made known in 
England by her burnings and destroyings ; and although she 
was known to be destined for the neighborhood of certain 
British ports, and does in fact made her appearance and cruise 
there for months, she is at the end of that time permitted to 
enter and lie in safety in a British port, without any effort 
to seize or detain her ; but, on the contrary, the local author- 
ities of Kingston are seen coming actively to her assistance, 
and returning her escaped creAv by force, the same as if she 
were a lawfully commissioned vessel, with whom the seamen 
might have a lawful contract of service. 

The legal liabilities which, under these circumstances, at- 
tach to the offending nation, are easily understood. Every 
nation, while it maintains the semblance of domestic govern- 
rnent, is responsible for the execution of its own laws, espe- 
cially such as are, in their nature, promises or compacts with 
other nations.* If the Confederate States were an independent 
and recognized nation, so that these vessels could have a bona- 
fide national character, England would still, under the cir- 
cumstances of their outfit, be responsible for them as if 
they were her own. And this would be so even if all the 
persons engaged in the matter were foreigners in England ; 
for a stranger owes the same allegiance to the laws of a coun- 
try, while he remains in it, as a oitizen ; and the law has equal 
power over him to compel his obedience; and, consequently, 
the government of the state has no ground here for a distinc- 
tion as to the liability it shall bear. It was upon this prin- 
ciple that, by the treaty of 1794, this nation agreed to make 
compensation for damages inflicted by French privateers fit- 

* Indeed, a state may not take refuge behind defects of its municipal law? \ for it is bound at 
its own p sril to provide effective domestic machinery to execute its international duties. It was 
upon thi- principle that England stood in the matter of Alexander McLood in 1838. McLeod had 
done an act for the British government, for which he was arrested as an offender against the laws 
of New York. His government avowed the responsibility of his act, and demanded from the 
UhitBd States his release. The Secretary of State, Mr. Webster, admitted, tli t since the act had 
been done under orders, it was no longer an individual offence, but a matter between the two na- 
tions, and recommended his release, but explained that the Federal Gcverimx nt had no power to 

take him from the custody of the state officers. England refused — very properly— to entertain as 
an excuse any defect in our system ; saying, that every nation, pretending to hold relations with 
other nation-, is bound to provide itself with t lie power to meet all just demands ; and had not the 
New York jury disagreed at the trial, we should have had war upon that question. 



28 ENGLISH neutrality* 

ted out in our ports. The philosophic statement of the 
principle is given by Burlemaqui, who cites Grotius and 
Heineccius, and is in turn cited by Phillimore (vol. ii., p. 
230), with approval, in these words : ' 

"In civil societies, when a particular member has done an injury to 
a stranger, the governor of the commonwealth is sometimes responsi- 
ble for it, so that war may be declared against him on that account. 
But to ground this kind of imputation, we must necessarily suppose 
one of these two things, sufferance or reception, viz. : either that the 
sovereign has permitted this harm to be done to the stranger, or that 
he afforded a retreat to the criminal. In the former case, it must be 
laid down as a maxim, that a sovereign who, knowing the crimes of his 
subjects — as, for example, that they practise piracy on strangers — and, 
being able and obliged to hinder it, does not hinder it, renders himself 

criminal, because he has consented to the bad action Now it 

is presumed that a sovereign knows what his subjects openly and fre- 
quently commit ; and as to his power of preventing the evil, this is al- 
ways presumed, unless the want of it be clearly proved." 

This principle extends, it will be perceived, so far as to 
make the neutral sovereign prima facie responsible for the 
unneutral acts of the belligerents when done or initiated with- 
in his jurisdiction. All the more is he bound to prevent, or 
if he does not prevent, to compensate for such acts done by 
his own subjects ; and the question remains, although no 
longer of the first importance, What is the national char- 
acter of- the Oreto and Alabama ? Each of those vessels was 
entirely built, equipped, and fitted, in British waters by En- 
glishmen. They are permitted to enter and lie in British 
ports as safely as if they were commissioned in her majesty's 
service, at the same time that our cruisers are warned off, 
and forbidden, even when in distress, to enter for coal — as 
in the cases of the Tuscarora, Flambeau, and Saginaw. 
The Oreto went to sea with a crew consisting of fifty-two 
Englishmen and one American. She sailed under En- 
glish papers for a legitimate port. Both were, at or about 
their departure, ascertained to be the private property of 
Englishmen. Unless some change of title has taken place 
these vessels are yet owned in England by Englishmen. If 
any such change has taken place, to whom has the title 
passed ?. Not to the Confederate States, or any rebellious citi- 
zen of that portion of this nation ; for, as between England 
and the rest of the world, these rebels are to be considered 
belligerents, and no contract between a citizen of a neutral 



IS THE ALABAMA A BRITISH PIRATE? 29 

state and a belligerent, to aid in any way the prosecution of 
war, is lawful ; on the contrary every suck agreement is ab 
initio void, and these vessels still remain the property of the 
British citizens who built them. The principle of law here 
stated has been decided solemnly in both England and Amer- 
ica. The English case is Demetrius De Wiitz v. Hendricks 
(9 Moore, C. P. Rep., 586-7 ; tried in 1824). The facts of 
that case involved a contract to raise money to aid the Greeks 
in their revolt against the Porte, the plaintiff claiming to act 
for the Exarch of Ravenna, under power of attorney, and the 
defendant being an English broker. The contract was de- 
clared by Lord Chief Justice Best to be void by the law of 
nations. The principal American case is Kennett v. Chambers 
(14 How, U. S. Rep., 38, 44). The facts were that Cham- 
bers, a Texan general, had agreed to convey a large tract of 
Texan lands in consideration of advances made, and to be 
made, at Cincinnati, for the purpose of aiding the Texans to 
carry on the revolution against Mexico, with which power we 
were at peace. The contract was made at Cincinnati, in 
1836, and the independence of Texas was not recognized by 
the President of the United States until 1837. A bill hav- 
ing been filed to obtain a specific performance of the contract 
to convey, the Court refused to enforce it, saying " the con- 
tract is not only void, but the parties who advanced the 
money were liable to be punished in a criminal prosecution 
for a violation of the neutrality laws of the United States." 

Thus, it is seen that the Oreto and Alabama, originally 
sailing from English ports, manned by English law-breakers, 
are still the property of English owners ; because all attempts 
on their part, if any such have been made, to convey their 
interests to our rebellious citizens, or any one of them, are 
absolutely void ,and of no effect. And it is a fair question 
for judicial and professional consideration, whether, in addi- 
tion to the criminal proceedings given by the Foreign Enlist- 
ment Act, the owners of the Jacob Bell may not have their 
action for damages against Fawcett, Preston & Co., of 
Liverpool, the owners of the Florida ; and the owners of the 
Brilliant, and other vessels destroyed by the Alabama, 
their respective actions against Messrs. Laird, of Birken- 
head, the reputed owners of that vessel. 

One more, interesting, but still less important question, 
practically, relates to the specific character of these vessels 



30 ENGLISH NEUTRALITY. 

and their crews. Are they pirates. ? Piracy is denned to be 
the offence of depredating upon the high seas, without being 
authorized by any sovereign state. (Wheat. Int. L., P. 2, 
c. 2, § 15.) These English sea-rovers claim, doubtless, to 
cruise under some kind of commission from the self-styled 
and unrecognized " Confederate States." I do not propose 
to discuss, with much seriousness, here, a question, which 
being in this place of little import, may hereafter, in a different 
discussion, become of the first magnitude ; still, I am com- 
pelled to say that, by the law and practice of nations, it ap- 
pears that no commission from an unknown, unrecognized 
authority can relieve the persons upon those vessels from the 
character of pirates, liable to punishment as such by any 
nation who may have the power and the will to enforce the 
penalties for that crime. Hautefeuille says (Des Nations 
Neutres, tit. 3, ch. 2) : 

" It is admitted by all nations, that in maritime wars every indi- 
vidual who commits acts of hostility without having received a regu- 
lar commission fiom his sovereign, however regularly he may make war, 
is regarded and treated as guilty of piracy." 

From what sovereign have the commanders of the Florida 
and Alabama received commissions ? Although, in view of 
what we now know has been done, it may be rash, I yet 
venture to assume that it is not from her majesty ; certainly 
not from the executive head of this nation. There is no 
government, such as they claim to represent, in existence — 
at least, having any such existence as would afford a legal 
protection to them, in case some nation which has not con- 
ceded to them belligerent rights, should choose to seize and 
try them as pirates : 

" For it is a firmly-established rule of British, American, and, in- 
deed, all jurisprudence, that it belongs exclusively to governments to 
recognize new states ; and that until such recognition, either ly the 
government of the country in whose tribunal the suit is brought, or by the 
government to which the new state belongs, courts of justice are bound 
to consider the ancient state of things as existing.'" (2 Phillimore 25 ; 
Eose v. Himnely 4 Cranch, 272 ; Hoyt v. Gelston 3 Wheat. 324.) 

Nor would it avail these men to plead that they are not — 
according to the general description of pirates — enemies to 
all mankind ; for in the case of the Magellan pirates, in 
1851 (see The Jurist), the learned Dr. Lushington, of the 
High Court of Admiralty, declared, concerning the law of 
nations relating to pirates : 



18 THE ALABAMA A BRITISH PIRATE ? 31 

" If it was clearly proved that the accused committed robbery and 
murder on the high seas, they were adjudged to be pirates, and suf- 
fered accordingly It does not follow that, because rebels 

and insurgents may commit against the ruling powers of their own 
country, acts of violence, they may not commit piratical acts against 
the subjects of other states." 

The same question arose shortly after the abdication of 
James II., in a manner to make it, in all essentials, precisely 
parallel to the one on hand. 

" That case involved a discussion of the general principle, whether, 
a deposed sovereign, claiming to be sovereign de jure, might lawfully 
commission privateers against the subjects and adherents of the sover- 
eign de facto on the throne ; or whether they were to be regarded as 
pirates, inasmuch as they were sailing ammo furandi et deproedendi 
without any national character." 

And, after stating at length the argument on both sides, 
Mr. Phillimore gives as his judgment : 

" That, after allowing every deduction in their favor, the reason of 
the thing must be allowed to preponderate greatly towards the opinion 
of Tindal, that these privateersmen were, by the law of nations, 
pirates." (I Philli. 398-40G.) 

But, whatever may be the correct judgment upon this 
point, one thing is certain, that all the character these ves- 
sels possess, is British ; and that if they are pirates at all, 
they are British pirates, roaming the seas, with the im- 
plied permission, if not actual connivance, of that gov- 
ernment ; and that for the depredations of these vessels, 
Great Britain is, by the spirit of the law, the usage of na- 
tions, and, especially, the precedent established in her favor 
and on her demand in 1794, bound to pay, even to the last 
dollar of loss. 

I have undertaken this hasty investigation, on account of 
the importance which international affairs are assuming, in 
consequence of the outrages of these lawless rovers, and be- 
cause of the prevalent ignorance — in which I fully shared — 
as to the true character and extent of our right in the prem- 
ises. Fortunately, the historical facts which have been 
cited, are such as carry the argument upon their face ; and, 
for the few conclusions which it has been necessary to draw, 
it is not doubted that they will be found by thosewho may 
give this grave subject more deliberate consideration — to be, 
in all essential characteristics, sustained by both letter and 



32 ENGLISH NEUTRALITY. 

spirit of the law. For the purpose of a brief recapitulation, 
these conclusions may be stated as follows : First. The obli- 
gation of neutrality which Great Britain owes this nation is 
based on international law, international comity, gratitude, 
the spirit of treaties, and, last and least, upon that compact 
with all the world, called the Act of 59 Geo. III. Second. 
That international law is the science of the external relations 
of nations, and that its sanctions are neither derived from nor 
dependent upon things municipal, but bear equally upon de- 
mocracies, aristocracies, and despotisms. Third. For this 
reason, no government can excuse itself from full performance 
of its international obligations by the suggestion of any lack 
of internal authority ; and within the scope of this proposi- 
tion, it may be safely asserted that, if that radical defect in 
the internal organization of this republic, which prevented 
the President of the United States from exercising control 
over the sheriff of an interior county of New York, was not a 
good excuse in McLeod's case, England will hardly make a 
defect of power in her revenue officers suffice in the matter of 
the Florida ; nor a queen's advocate's H malady" in that of the 
Alabama. Fourth. That it was the duty of the British gov- 
ernment in both cases, after the application of Mr. Adams, 
to have followed the "Maury" precedent by seizing and hold- 
ing the vessels, and thus preventing mischief, until a full in- 
vestigation could have been had ; and having failed in this, 
it was a duty all the more imperative, when the real purpose 
of these vessels was known, to follow the Portuguese-Tercei- 
ra precedent, by sending British cruisers to the ends of the 
earth, to prevent the consummation of the fraud, as well as 
bring the criminals to justice for their offence against the dig- 
nity and peace of England. Fifth. That the action of the 
British government, certainly, and its motive, apparently, 
have been grossly in breach of its neutral obligations. Sixth. 
That it is a maxim in universal justice, as well as in the com- 
mon law, that there is no wrong without a remedy ; and the 
remedies for these injuries are of two kinds : 1st, by civil ac- 
tion and criminal prosecution against the English owners, 
their servants, agents, and abettors ; and, 2d, by the demand, 
and receipt from that government, of full compensation to pri- 
vate sufferers ; and in default of the latter, by reprisals and Avar. 
And, in justification of such a war, we may appeal to En- 
glish state papers, where the reasons will be found, set out 
with all requisite particularity by England's greatest histo- 
rian for one of her greatest kings. 

H* -221 85 



B?^ 







^O* 




'oK 











j V" s • • 












' * ^ ^> ° ' 
















r o>' 










*> ^ 









• A V *^ 




lg^ N. MANCHESTER' I *fi <& 

1^7 INDIANA 46962^ , ^^^^ - 



HECKMAN 

BINDERY INC. 

MAY 85 









